I am sure this will stir up the debate about annuities but I remember reading an investment/retirement article some time ago about using annuities to establish a floor of income at some older age. This was written by a respected name in the business if my recall is correct. The idea is your money would not dwindle to zero, you would just hit a floor for annual income with only a COLA on your social security at an advanced age. If our plans were failing and we are too old to work it might be something to consider. Does anyone remember this article?

no, but many academics and retirement planning experts would agree with that approach

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide? That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

That's definitely an option. Plan S.

As for the premise of this thread, it is impossible to know one's lifespan in advance. Therefore, retirement planning is financial decision making under uncertainty. To probabilities, add personal risk tolerance. Hence, some will leave large estates and others will die impoverished. Most forum members would prefer to err on the side of the former.

I am sure this will stir up the debate about annuities but I remember reading an investment/retirement article some time ago about using annuities to establish a floor of income at some older age. This was written by a respected name in the business if my recall is correct. The idea is your money would not dwindle to zero, you would just hit a floor for annual income with only a COLA on your social security at an advanced age. If our plans were failing and we are too old to work it might be something to consider. Does anyone remember this article?

Wade Pfau would be one of those respected names among others that discuss optimal nestegg utilization.

The concept - widely ignored on this forum - is to cover some baseline living standard with Social Security, pensions(if any) , and SPIA's or equivalent bought with your nest-egg to insure a catfood-free lifestyle.

Then have some sort of plan to more aggressively spend down and fully utilize the remaining nest-egg over a reasonable timeframe.

Many on this forum will go with large unspent (remaining) nest-eggs having foregone a better lifestyle.

My closest relatives that have passed left at ages 33, 49, 53, 67, 68, 69, 73, 75, and 76 - all from cancer or heart disease. Of those still living, one recently turned 95. A few others are 80+. My parents are 65 and 78 with no signs of leaving soon. 80% of aunts and uncles had cancer of some form by age 55.

With a family history like this, how am I supposed to pick a date? That would be ridiculous. So I do my planning on the assumption that I will leave some behind. It's just a matter of how much. The Social Security Life Expectancy calculator says to expect at least age 85, but that is based on averages. No way would I plan as if I'm going to use it up by a certain point.

I should have been more specific - genetic testing for cancer or heart conditions

Oh, I understood what you meant. Yes, I've been tested for mutations and genetic precursors. Nothing found, which actually surprised the person who ran the test. But she said that just means I have the same chances as anybody with a family history - higher than the general population, lower than those born with mutations. I've also had a number of scares that haven't resulted in cancer yet but do keep me under constant vigilance. My point is, I could live to 100 having fought cancer multiple times, or I could die on the way home from w*rk. So I exercise but also enjoy cupcakes...I save a lot but also see movies at the luxury theater with a $12 bucket of popcorn...and I've planned my retirement so I will easily cover desired expenses and also leave some behind. Since I'm working towards a pension I can't really retire any earlier...unless those Powerball numbers come through for me, haha.

Why does anyone pay any attention to moneygrubber? It is very easy to know what ones life expectancy is at any age, and with a tiny bit more time to find out the SD. So if you are conservative, add 2 SD to the expectancy for your age and sex, and you should have a pretty good guess at the limit.

Maybe distraction form the January blahs is needed? You likely need at least one SD merely to allow for the type of person who achieves early retirement

Ha

__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams

So everyone plans for a 30 40 or 50 year retirement, how many of your family members, friends, associates never made it to 50, 60, or 70, get real, life is short, we know how many years have past, we dont know how many lie ahead....

Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

Hey you don't have to convince me. My husband and I went to Vegas January of 2013 for his 50th birthday, he died September of that same year from an aggressive form of Leukemia.

In the last 3 years I've buried my husband, my baby brother and my nephew all before the age of 55.

I'm spending my money and enjoying myself. If I'm broke at 90 so be it. I will be the anomaly, I've already told my kids not to expect anything w hen I die..

I think that you are right BCLOVER. I also think that the OP's question is rather simple. Do we try too hard to guarantee 100% when the odds of living to say 100 or 95 is very low. I know that there are many who will live into their 90's, but as I see my mother age, my grandparents all dead (and miserable for the one that did live into her 90's) I don't know that I want to live that long anyway. But I'm still a big chicken and doing OMY anyway.

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

Wade Pfau would be one of those respected names among others that discuss optimal nestegg utilization.

The concept - widely ignored on this forum - is to cover some baseline living standard with Social Security, pensions(if any) , and SPIA's or equivalent bought with your nest-egg to insure a catfood-free lifestyle.

Then have some sort of plan to more aggressively spend down and fully utilize the remaining nest-egg over a reasonable timeframe.

Many on this forum will go with large unspent (remaining) nest-eggs having foregone a better lifestyle.

If buying a SPIA to establish a floor was anywhere near a neutral expense, more people would do so. There's a high probability you will pay a substantial premium for the payout your SPIA will provide, especially at present interest rate/yields. That premium, and forever limiting your options after buying a SPIA (a big chunk of $ is gone), is the reason buying an annuity doesn't make sense to many, though it may for others.

Even those (self included) who never plan to buy an annuity, might if their nest egg falls too far too soon. I'd consider an annuity only when/if my nest egg starts to approach my annuitization hurdle at any given age. Linked here several times http://www.schulmerichandassoc.com/M...cumulation.pdf

Most here didn't retire at that threshold...

People who retire at/near or below their annuitization hurdle may indeed be best served by a SPIA. Otar is another discipline like Pfau.

If buying a SPIA to establish a floor was anywhere near a neutral expense, more people would do so. There's a high probability you will pay a substantial premium for the payout your SPIA will provide, especially at present interest rate/yields. That premium, and forever limiting your options after buying a SPIA, is the reason buying an annuity doesn't make sense to many, though it may for others.

I think (hope) what we see in DC-only land is that these plans start to offer more annuity-type payout options, including QLACs. That way, retirees can choose immediate and/or deferred annuities and a lump sum options to suit their needs and provide a hedge against cat food or suicide.

If buying a SPIA to establish a floor was anywhere near a neutral expense, more people would do so. There's a high probability you will pay a substantial premium for the payout your SPIA will provide, especially at present interest rate/yields. That premium, and forever limiting your options after buying a SPIA (a big chunk of $ is gone), is the reason buying an annuity doesn't make sense to many, though it may for others.

Even those (self included) who never plan to buy an annuity, might if their nest egg falls too far too soon. I'd consider an annuity only when/if my nest egg starts to approach my annuitization hurdle at any given age. Linked here several times http://www.schulmerichandassoc.com/M...cumulation.pdf

Most here didn't retire at that threshold...

People who retire at/near or below their annuitization hurdle may indeed be best served by a SPIA. Otar is another discipline like Pfau.

Yes SPIA income can be costly.

I have seen the annuity crossover approach you list. In my opinion it is a loose-variant of the approach I referred to.

The main point I wanted to get across though, is that the standard 3-4 percent of assets (i.e.. Trinity-type approach) while indeed safe is much less than optimum in terms of spending lifestyle. The SPIA-floor approach (or equivalent) just may be equally safe yet provide quite a bit more spendable income during the years that matter.

YThe SPIA-floor approach (or equivalent) just may be equally safe yet provide quite a bit more spendable income during the years that matter.

+1
While I do not see an annuity in my future, I have to agree. There economic and psychological considerations to consider. If an annuity leaves a person feeling confident that she won't be eating cat food on the street at some future point in time, then it may be just the right thing. If it allows a person to take some of the cash they have invested in 1.47% two year CD's and invest it in the market for a better return, and not panic and sell when the market crumbles like last week, then an annuity can be a good thing.

No, I am not telling anybody they should buy an annuity.

__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.

If buying a SPIA to establish a floor was anywhere near a neutral expense, more people would do so. There's a high probability you will pay a substantial premium for the payout your SPIA will provide, especially at present interest rate/yields. That premium, and forever limiting your options after buying a SPIA (a big chunk of $ is gone), is the reason buying an annuity doesn't make sense to many, though it may for others.

Even those (self included) who never plan to buy an annuity, might if their nest egg falls too far too soon. I'd consider an annuity only when/if my nest egg starts to approach my annuitization hurdle at any given age. Linked here several times http://www.schulmerichandassoc.com/M...cumulation.pdf

Most here didn't retire at that threshold...

People who retire at/near or below their annuitization hurdle may indeed be best served by a SPIA. Otar is another discipline like Pfau.

Thanks for this thought/article on annuitization hurdle. It does provide a nice quick and dirty "how am I doing check".

Latest Threads

Social Knowledge Community

About Us

This community was started in 2002 as an alternative to a then fee only Motley Fool. The focus of the discussions is on topics related to early retirement and financial independence. The community is moderated to ensure a pleasant experience for our members.